Talk:Johnson & Johnson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Companies Portal
This article is within the scope of Companies WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of companies. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Top This article has been rated as top-importance on the assessment scale.
Business and economics Portal
This article is within the scope of the Business and Economics WikiProject.
Start rated as start-Class on the assessment scale
Mid rated as mid-importance on the assessment scale

[edit] Referencing sub-companies

I think there are two missing categories or terms:

I dont think "tylenol scare" should be in this article Arigont
First, what is "tylenol scare"? Second, is it good practice to delete without giving other Wikipedia standards and default cases? I am sure other companies reference sub-companies, too? Joerg Kurt Wegner 19:44, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
"tylenol scare" was when people were putting cyanide into tylenol capsules. It's important because this is what led to the tamper-proof packaging that modern pharmaceutics come in. It's also interesting to note that J&J no long produces capsules because of this. I agree that the credo should be mentioned because it is the credo that drove the massive tylenol recall at great expense to the company...209.74.0.248 22:54, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I restored the section because I think it is an important event in the history of the company. What is the reason for deleting it? --Ed (Edgar181) 19:50, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] J&J use of the Red Cross

Please do NOT insert any more claims that the U.S. is violating the Geneva Conventions by permitting J&J to continue its trademark on the Red Cross. It is correct that, as a rule, the Geneva Conventions do not specifically provide for national exceptions to their reservation of the emblems of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement for specific international uses (except for a clause in Protocol III as to pre-2005 uses of the Red Crystal). However, U.S. ratification of the 1949 Conventions contained two reservations where the U.S. specifically disclaimed parts of the Conventions; one of those, as I just added to this article, permits J&J's pre-1905 use of the Red Cross to continue with minor exceptions. This is in addition to several principles of U.S. law that would likely prevent overruling J&J's trademark without legal condemnation of the trademark (and payment to J&J) by an act of Congress asserting eminent domain. --RBBrittain 23:51, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why I am planning to replace the current photo in the article with a new photo

The current photo has several major faults:

1. Poor contrast. 2. Poor color balancing (too blue). 3. Shot at an angle slightly towards the sun (as evidenced by the shadow) when superior angles are available (I just visited New Brunswick, so I can personally attest to this). 4. Shot in winter when the trees look half-dead and therefore very ugly.

Within a week (as soon as I do final cropping, rotating, and color correction) I will be uploading a replacement which I just shot, at a better angle and in the best season (summer). Any objections before I delete the old photo from this article? --Coolcaesar 04:44, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

No objections have been posted, so I'm getting ready to post my new version right now. --Coolcaesar 20:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Done. --Coolcaesar 21:37, 16 September 2007 (UTC)